Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Commissioner of Public Works of The City of Charleston v. Dude Products Inc.
as 2:2024cv02935
Plaintiff:
Commissioner of Public Works of The City of Charleston d/b/a Charleston Water System, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Defendant:
Dude Products Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products
as 24-1225
Not Yet Classified:
In re: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff:
PLAINTIFFS, CITY OF BENWOOD, CITY OF BROCKTON and others
Appellant:
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Defendant:
THE CHEMOURS COMPANY, THE CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC, E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY, now known as EIDP, Inc. and others
Sherida Johnson, et al v. Nissan North America, Inc.
as 22-16644
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SHERIDA JOHNSON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, SUBRINA SEENARAIN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, CHAD LOURY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and others
Defendant / Appellant:
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC.
Tamara Lohr, et al v. Nissan North America, Inc., et al
as 22-35473
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TAMARA LOHR and RAVIKIRAN SINDOGI, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
Defendant / Appellee:
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC. and NISSAN MOTOR CO., LTD.
Marchiony v. Waterworks Operating Co., LLC
as 3:2022cv00751
Plaintiff:
Brian Marchiony and Amica Mutual Insurance Company, a/s/o Brian Marchiony, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated
Defendant:
Waterworks Operating Co., LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Stephen Dye, et al v. Tamko Building Products, Inc.
as 17-14052
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STEPHEN DYE, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and DOUGLAS BOHN, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
Defendant - Appellee:
TAMKO BUILDING PRODUCTS, INC.
Homesite Insurance Company, et al v. Gree Electric Appliances, Inc., et al
as 17-55887
Plaintiff - Appellee:
HOMESITE INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, AMERICAN STRATEGIC INSURANCE CORPORATION, MERIDIAN SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Defendant - Appellant:
GREE ELECTRIC APPLIANCES, INC. OF ZHUHAI, HONG KONG GREE ELECTRIC APPLIANCES SALES LTD. and GREE USA, INC.
Defendant:
MJC AMERICA, LTD., a California corporation
Steve Chambers, et al v. Whirlpool Corporation, et al
as 16-56694
Plaintiff - Appellee:
STEVE CHAMBERS, an individual and for all others similarly situated, LYNN VAN DER VEER, an individual and for all others similarly situated, JOSEPH CICCHELLI, an individual and for all others similarly situated and others
Objector - Appellant:
W. ALLEN MCDONALD, Christopher T Cain for Objector
Defendant - Appellee:
WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation and SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO., INC., a New York corporation
Steve Chambers, et al v. Whirlpool Corporation, et al
as 16-56688
Plaintiff - Appellee:
STEVE CHAMBERS, an individual and for all others similarly situated, LYNN VAN DER VEER, an individual and for all others similarly situated, JOSEPH CICCHELLI, an individual and for all others similarly situated and others
Objector - Appellant:
GEORGE P. LIACOPOULOS
Defendant - Appellee:
WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation and SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO., INC., a New York corporation
Steve Chambers, et al v. Whirlpool Corporation, et al
as 16-56686
Plaintiff - Appellee:
STEVE CHAMBERS, an individual and for all others similarly situated, LYNN VAN DER VEER, an individual and for all others similarly situated, JOSEPH CICCHELLI, an individual and for all others similarly situated and others
Objector - Appellant:
KELLY KRESS
Defendant - Appellee:
WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation and SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO., INC., a New York corporation
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
